T110's Northern Migration

The_Chieftain: I don't know if Miller got anything particularly wrong, other than the question of whether a sawn-off shotgun has any military utility. Apparently nobody brought up trench guns, but since the appellant was dead by the time it got to oral argument, I guess he can't be blamed for it.   It is worth noting that the Federal Constitution is not the only one at hand. 46 States have a right to bear arms in their Constitutions as well; some from the 18th Century such as Pennsylvania's "The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned", some are very explicit, such as Delaware's more 20th Century "A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreational use."    Arguments about ownership of the firearms are frivolous. The concept of ancillary rights necessary to the exercise of an enumerated right has been well solidified by the courts. For example, the right to free speech means the right to acquire books, and the right to firearms includes the right to have a place to practice shooting (See Ezell v Chicago, 7th Circuit). If there's a right to bear arms, there's a corollary right to own them.